From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jesse Barnes Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 14:47:02 +0000 Subject: Re: Altix I/O code reorganization Message-Id: <200408120747.02508.jbarnes@engr.sgi.com> List-Id: References: <200408042014.i74KE8fD141211@fsgi900.americas.sgi.com> <411AAABB.8070707@sgi.com> <20040812101507.C5988@infradead.org> In-Reply-To: <20040812101507.C5988@infradead.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: Patrick Gefre , linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thursday, August 12, 2004 2:15 am, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > And, let me repeat: > > There is absolutely _NO_ interest in adding yet another non-standard > prom interface for PCI configuration. IA64 has a standard ACPI-based > interface that everyone but SGI implementent. Please implement that > one in your firmware. Our platform does not currently support ACPI based PCI discovery and configuration. My claim is that this patchset gets us closer to being able to implement it. You aren't saying that any changes to the codebase should be rejected until ACPI is 100% supported, are you? That seems like a silly stance to take since it precludes incremental improvements in the codebase. IOW, assuming the patchset meets with general approval in other ways, you wouldn't oppose its inclusion just because it doesn't go far enough, would you? Thanks, Jesse